Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • biz82
    • By biz82 10th Jun 17, 12:57 PM
    • 10Posts
    • 0Thanks
    biz82
    Car deemed illegal/dangerous after service
    • #1
    • 10th Jun 17, 12:57 PM
    Car deemed illegal/dangerous after service 10th Jun 17 at 12:57 PM
    I bought a car privately 3 months ago which had just had a new mot with no advisories. Today I took it for a service which the mechanic stopped after lifting the car because of the damage he had found. He got me to look as he pointed out the holes and heavy corrosion to the subframe. He said how lucky I was that it hadn't given way before now.

    I've driven 2000 miles since purchasing this car and the mot was done on the 1st of March. I'm disgusted and embarrassed that I've used this car with my 2 year old daughter as a passenger and consider myself extremely fortunate that I haven't caused harm to anyone since owning it.

    There are other problems which need fixing and the total cost isn't worth it so I'm left with scrap and £1500 out of pocket. Surely this should never have passed its mot. What if anything can I do in this situation? I realise my rights are very limited when purchasing a second hand car privately. I took lots of photos of the damage while the car was lifted in the air.
    Last edited by biz82; 10-06-2017 at 12:59 PM.
Page 1
    • Browntoa
    • By Browntoa 10th Jun 17, 1:00 PM
    • 31,345 Posts
    • 37,035 Thanks
    Browntoa
    • #2
    • 10th Jun 17, 1:00 PM
    • #2
    • 10th Jun 17, 1:00 PM
    First instance complain about the mot

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/complain-about-an-mot

    If it proved to be a fake mot I'd say you have good grounds for a small claims court despite it being a private sale
    I'm the Board Guide of the Referrers ,Telephones, Pensions , Shop Don't drop ,over 50's and Discount Code boards which means I'm a volunteer to help them run smoothly and I can move and merge posts there. However, please remember, board guides don't read every post. If you spot an inappropriate or illegal post please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com Any views are mine and not the official line of MoneySavingExpert.
    • biz82
    • By biz82 10th Jun 17, 1:21 PM
    • 10 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    biz82
    • #3
    • 10th Jun 17, 1:21 PM
    • #3
    • 10th Jun 17, 1:21 PM
    Thanks I will do that. It says that corrosion related complaints should be within 3 months of the mot being issued. This has now passed. Do you think they would still investigate this? I could send the photos I've taken with the complaint form. There is no way this amount of damage has happened since the mot!
    • Fosterdog
    • By Fosterdog 10th Jun 17, 1:38 PM
    • 2,996 Posts
    • 5,178 Thanks
    Fosterdog
    • #4
    • 10th Jun 17, 1:38 PM
    • #4
    • 10th Jun 17, 1:38 PM
    The problem you will have is that it wouldn't have to be all of the corrosion caused since the MOT just enough to tip it over the edge from a pass/advisory to a fail.

    Have you had any second opinion on it or just taken the word of the person doing the service? It may be worth another look from someone else to see if they agree that either it is as dangerous as you have been told and whether or not it could have happened in three months.

    The other problem you would have, even if it shouldn't have passed its MOT, as the seller was a private individual unless you could prove that they knew it had a dodgy MOT you'd have no claim against them as they sold you a roadworthy/road safe car as far as they knew.
    • paddyrg
    • By paddyrg 10th Jun 17, 2:19 PM
    • 12,997 Posts
    • 11,072 Thanks
    paddyrg
    • #5
    • 10th Jun 17, 2:19 PM
    • #5
    • 10th Jun 17, 2:19 PM
    Corrosion of a chassis can't go from 'fine' to 'death trap' in 3 months, so you very likely have a case. The MOT inspection should certainly have mentioned it if the corrosion was so close to being usage that a few months was the difference between pass and fail.
    • unholyangel
    • By unholyangel 10th Jun 17, 3:42 PM
    • 10,954 Posts
    • 8,214 Thanks
    unholyangel
    • #6
    • 10th Jun 17, 3:42 PM
    • #6
    • 10th Jun 17, 3:42 PM
    With private sales the only real requirement is that they must be able to pass good title and that they need to match their description.

    While selling an unroadworthy car is an offence, trading standards have a policy of not prosecuting private individuals. On top of this, not all faults will make a car unroadworthy - from memory it covers things like brakes, steering etc.

    So, how was the car described in any advertising/communications OP?
    Money doesn't solve poverty.....it creates it.
    • bris
    • By bris 10th Jun 17, 4:08 PM
    • 6,646 Posts
    • 5,691 Thanks
    bris
    • #7
    • 10th Jun 17, 4:08 PM
    • #7
    • 10th Jun 17, 4:08 PM
    A car can and will fail for a corroded subframe. the question is when the holes started to appear and were they evident at the time of the MOT.


    If they say that corrosion complaints should be within 3 months then it's for good reason. They will probably not investigate since it's outside this timeframe.


    Is it really a private seller though? There are a lot of part time dealers out there, a lot of them know garages they use for repairs etc that will be a bit easy on MOT's.


    If it is indeed a private seller then surely you looked at the car before buying it, if it's so noticeable it would be easy for even a novice to spot.


    Depending on where you bought it sometimes you can check their past history of sales, try searching for other listings they may have had. They may have sold a few in the past and it wouldn't take many for the court to see they were in fact dealers.
    • angryparcel
    • By angryparcel 10th Jun 17, 4:10 PM
    • 910 Posts
    • 516 Thanks
    angryparcel
    • #8
    • 10th Jun 17, 4:10 PM
    • #8
    • 10th Jun 17, 4:10 PM
    An MOT covers the car at the time of the test. If you take it away after the test and the lights fail, does that mean its a fake MOT.
    • unholyangel
    • By unholyangel 10th Jun 17, 4:16 PM
    • 10,954 Posts
    • 8,214 Thanks
    unholyangel
    • #9
    • 10th Jun 17, 4:16 PM
    • #9
    • 10th Jun 17, 4:16 PM
    An MOT covers the car at the time of the test. If you take it away after the test and the lights fail, does that mean its a fake MOT.
    Originally posted by angryparcel
    No, but if you go back through its MOT history and (for example) corrosion was an advisory on the year before yet this years didn't mention it at all, its a good indication that the MOT wasn't carried out properly/at all.
    Money doesn't solve poverty.....it creates it.
    • biz82
    • By biz82 10th Jun 17, 6:29 PM
    • 10 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    biz82
    I've had a closer look at the previous mot's online as I only had the most recent one and the only advisory was in 2013 for "rear subframe bushes starting to debond". There are no receipts so therefore no evidence that any work has been carried out. The other thing that strikes me as suspicious is that the last 4 service stamps are identical, as is the handwriting underneath them. The guy I bought it from did seem genuine with reasonable answers for all my questions and upon looking at the car it seemed in good condition. I was only about to see inside and out. The only way for me to see the level of damage would have been to get under the car as I did today. I'm now starting to think that he wasn't as honest and trustworthy as he appeared.

    The extent of the corrosion is such that it would have been evident for much longer than the date of the last mot. I think the next thing I need to do is contact the dealer who apparently serviced the car on the last 4 occasions to see if they can provide any record of the car ever being there. At least then I'll know for sure if the seller was deceiving me and whether I have a case at all.
    • waamo
    • By waamo 10th Jun 17, 6:35 PM
    • 1,673 Posts
    • 1,973 Thanks
    waamo
    How was it described in the advert? Whilst it's a private sale it still needs to be as advertised.

    Have you tried putting the sellers mobile number into your favourite search engine. This may flag up if he is a business disguised as a private seller.
    This space for hire.
    • Fosterdog
    • By Fosterdog 10th Jun 17, 6:48 PM
    • 2,996 Posts
    • 5,178 Thanks
    Fosterdog
    You also need to look at what is reasonable for the age of the car, mileage and the price paid. If it had an advisory in 2013 then the car is at least 7 years old, older if that was not the first MOT carried out.

    If it is just 7 years old with low mileage and you paid a fair bit for it then you would expect it to last a lot longer and be in better condition than one that is 15 years old, high mileage and being sold at around scrap prices
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

426Posts Today

4,651Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Byebye! I'm about to stop work & twitter, to instead spend glorious time with Mrs & mini MSE. Wishing u a lovely summer. See u in 10 days.

  • WARNING Did you start Uni in or after 2012? The interest's rising to 6.1%; yet it doesnt work like you think. See https://t.co/IQ8f0Vyetu RT

  • RT @JanaBeee: @MartinSLewis Boris is the anomaly (coffee), the others are versions of normal (beer). Lots of same candidates = vote share d?

  • Follow Martin